|Israel Resource Review
||10th October, 2001
The Precise Statement of the Israel Prime Minister Concerning Czechoslovakia
After the following statement of Israel Prime Minister Ariel
Sharon, Israeli Knesset opposition leader claimed that Sharon
was comparing US President George W. Bush to Then-British Prime
Minister Neville Chamberlain. This is Sharon's statement:
Released from the Office of the Israel Prime Minister, October 4, 2001
Today, Israel suffered another heinous Palestinian terrorist attack,
which took a heavy toll: Three dead and seven wounded.
All our efforts to reach a cease-fire have been torpedoed by the Palestinians.
The fire did not cease, not even for one day.
The Cabinet has therefore instructed our security forces to take all necessary measures to bring full security to the citizens of Israel.
We can rely on ourselves only.
We are currently in the midst of a complex and difficult political
I call on the Western democracies, and primarily the leader
of the free world, the United States:
Do not repeat the dreadful mistake of 1938, when enlightened European democracies decided to sacrifice Czechoslovakia for 'a convenient temporary solution.' Do not try to appease the Arabs at our expense - this is unacceptable to us. Israel will not be Czechoslovakia. Israel will fight terrorism.
There is no 'good terrorism' and 'bad terrorism,' as there is no 'good murder' and 'bad murder.'
Terrorism, as we witnessed this week in Alei Sinai, is worse than murder.
We have been fighting terrorism for over 100 years.
Unfortunately, there is no swift and immediate solution, but if we confront this terrorism united, we will be able to overcome it and bring peace.
And we shall overcome.
friendly version of this article
Return to Contents
Sharon's Statement on Czechoslovakia: Background
Shimon Schiffer and Nahum Barnea
Senior Correspondents, Yediot Aharonot
On Thursday,German Foreign Minister Joschka Fischer telephoned Prime Minister Ariel Sharon. Fischer was excited, and told Sharon: "I spoke with Bashar Assad. He told me that Syria has always been against terror. You have no idea how touched I was, hearing such things from the Syrian president."
Sharon was furious. Suddenly hearing that Syria is against terror, and
has "always" been against terror. The serial terror enemy! And how did the
German foreign minister react to those lies? With excitement.
On the heels of this introduction, there naturally came a request from
Israel. "You have to make concessions to the Palestinians," said Fischer.
"These concessions my be painful for your generation, but they will
guarantee a better future for the next generations."
Several hours later, Sharon Spoke at a press conference and accused the
West, headed by the US, that it is delivering Israel over to terror just as
the West handed over Czechoslovakia to Hitler in Munich in 1938. The
conversation with Fischer was like waving a red flag, one of many. For
weeks Sharon had been drawing near an explosion of this kind.
Sharon's statements sparked a great deal of anger in Washington. White
House Spokesman Ari Fleischer said that President Bush views Sharon's
statements as unacceptable. He was asked why President Bush had not been in
touch with Sharon. After all, Israel and the US are allies. Fleischer
answered, "This is not the time."
There were five phone calls between Sharon and Secretary of State Colin
Powell since Sharon spoke at the press conference. Sharon's bureau issued a
calming message. The former ambassador, Zalman Shoval, was called upon to
explain that Sharon did not mean what he said, in actual point of fact.
Powell, for his part, gave a damage control interview to AP, saying that
occasionally there are clouds in the relationship between Israel and the
US, but that they do not affect their intensity.
However, at the same time, officials at the State Department did their
utmost to inflate the incident. The officials there have an agenda of
their own. America is currently at a very sensitive juncture, between a
lethal terror blow and the opening of a war. The world is divided into good
buys and bad guys, and President Bush is the leader of the good guys. The
link Sharon made between him and the most terrible act of betrayal of the
twentieth century was received, at best, with a astonishment.
"There is a moment when you discover things are being done behind your
back," said Sharon. "I decided, this far and no more. A war is soon to
begin. Israel will be asked to make excessive concessions to the
Palestinians. Should it refuse, it will be accused of undermining the war.
It was the last possible moment."
In order to understand the events leading to Sharon's outburst, one has
to return to September 11, 2001. In fact, the roots of the crisis predate
the terror attack. Over the summer, the State Department prepared an
American program for a comprehensive arrangement at the heart of which was
a call for the establishment of a Palestinian state. Powell was to announce
the principles of the plan in a speech to the UN General Assembly on
The plan was prepared behind Israel's back. The Israeli government was
surprised; it always is. Also in the past, at times that seemed to the
Israeli government as the height of friendship and coordination, American
plans were made behind its back with regard to the Palestinian issue. It
happened with Carter, Reagan and Bush Sr. It did not happen with Clinton.
None of these plans were ever implemented in practice. They were all
"still-born," as Menahem Begin said of the Reagan plan. And that is exactly
what Sharon would like to have happen to the new American plan. His
statements were meant as a preemptive strike, before the American plan is
revealed. They were meant as a deterrent and to make the lines of the
American plan less binding.
The terror attacks in the US delayed the publication of plan, but also
increased its proponents' ambitions. Facing Israel in this struggle are not
only the Arabists, who have taken over the management of Middle Eastern
affairs at the State Department from Jews like Dennis Ross, but also Arab
officials, headed by Prince Bandar Abu Sultan, Saudi Arabia's all-powerful
ambassador to Washington.
William Safire, the influential New York Times columnist, revealed last
week, that the day following the terror attacks, Prince Bandar handled
getting 14 of Bin Laden's relatives, who were on US soil at the time, out
of America. FBI investigators protested this action to their superiors, but
their protest was of no avail. Safire wrote that the Saudi royal court had
made sure to water down previous investigations into Bin Laden's crimes as
well. The Saudis were concerned that an in-depth investigation would lead
to them, to the acts of corruption and surrendering to corruption which
allow the Saudi court to survive.
Sharon claimed that from the moment the Americans decided to form a
coalition against Bin Laden and to include Moslem countries in it, they put
Israel on hold. In crisis situations Israel has always been changed from
lawful spouse to concubine, but this time Israel was truly ignored, as
though it does not even exist.
That is the case even though Sharon said that Israel has been providing
the United States with "priceless" intelligence information about the Bin
Laden front. Sharon gave instructions to put "everything" at the Americans'
disposal, both in terms of intelligence as well as in information on the
combat methods of special units. Sharon says that, covertly, the Americans
thank Israel every day for the crucial information it is providing them.
However, when US Secretary of Defense Donald Ramsfeld comes to the
region, the only friendly country he does not visit is Israel. Ramsfeld
telephoned his counterpart, Fuad Ben-Eliezer, and let him understand that
Israel is not part of the plan. Sharon had a hard time swallowing that.
Sharon asked the Americans to include Hamas, Islamic Jihad and
Hizbullah on the new list of terrorist organizations. The Americans
refused, saying they are on the previous list. Sharon understood the
refusal otherwise: In practice, the administration is distinguishing
between what it defines as "global terror" (i.e., terror against America)
and what it defines as "local terror" (i.e., terror against Israel).
The Americans want to include Iran in their coalition. Sharon views this
American intention with deep concern, not simply because it involves the
United States granting legitimacy to continued acts of terror by Hizbullah,
but because it means granting legitimacy to the continued construction of
Iran's nuclear power, a power which adversely affects Israel's strategic
And the main issue is the pressure with regard to Arafat. According to
Sharon's perception, on this point the administration has moved from
ignoring to undermining. Bush and Powell pressured Sharon to authorize the
Peres-Arafat meeting. When Sharon objected to a meeting under fire, they
pressured Arafat to halt the terrorism. However, ever since Peres and
Arafat had their joint photograph taken the Americans have disappeared.
They stopped pressuring Arafat, who of course got the hint, and loosened
On Thursday, Sharon was at the Shikmim Farm. The news he received was
grave. After the terror attack on the settlement of Elei Sinai, the firing
at the square outside the Tomb of the Patriarchs and the shooting on the
Ramot road in Jerusalem, came the terror attack in Afula, and on another
level the terrible news of the plane downed over the Black Sea.
The Palestinian Authority issued a condemnation of the terror attack at
Elei Sinai. Merely hours later, a Fatah activist entered the Afula central
bus station and murdered civilians. "After all that," said Sharon, "Arafat
is praised by the whole world for deigning to issue a condemnation. That is
completely out of line."
Sharon decided to cancel his attendance at an event at Menehmia in the
Galilee, and instead to convene a press conference in Tel Aviv. The reason
was the plane disaster. But when Sharon sat down to write his opening
statements, he was thinking mainly of the Americans and Arafat.
The statement, including the mention of Munich, was written in his own
hand, without prior consultations. Sharon erased only one sentence before
stepping up to the microphone. The original statement said that he had
decided to lower the flags in Israel to half-mast as a sign of mourning for
the passengers who died in the plane crash. Sharon checked with the
ministerial committee on ceremony, and was told that the Jewish customs
preclude mourning during a holiday. Therefore, the flags remained flying at
"I held off and held off," Sharon said. "I permitted the meeting between
Peres and Arafat. After that, the Americans wanted Abu Ala and also Saeb
Erekat. I allowed it. But there's a limit. The moment a war begins, there
will be an American delegate here with a program, and Israel will be
presented as sabotaging the war effort."
Sharon chose to reprimand the administration publicly instead of doing
so quietly, over the telephone. "Since when do we give the Americans
speeches in advance?" he said.
On Friday, Sharon received information that the American ambassador to
Tel Aviv, Dan Kurtzer, was briefing ministers against him. The ambassador
explained that the prime minister's speech was damaging to Israeli-US
relations. Sharon also heard that Kurtzer was supposedly involved in
briefings that were given to American journalists that included harsh
criticism of the prime minister. The two spoke on the phone on Friday.
Sharon reprimanded the ambassador. "Imagine," he told him, "that I were to
call the Number Two of your embassy and speak against your actions to him.
It would never occur to me to do that." Kurtzer expressed regret.
The adversaries of the Sharon government in Washington, who have gained
strength in recent weeks, do not perceive Sharon the way he perceives
himself. They emphasize Sharon's internal political problems, his
increasing difficulty to maneuver between his government and the Left, and
Binyamin Netanyahu breathing down his neck, and maybe also the police
investigation about his campaign finances that is about to begin.
Sharon has a good many reasons to be angry with the Bush administration.
He is convinced that the coalition that the Americans are trying to found
will not come into being, and even if it does, it will not help the
Americans in their fight against terrorism. To the Americans, the price
that Israel is being asked to pay is perhaps very small, but to Sharon it
But it is doubtful whether he chose the right time for a confrontation
with the President, and he certainly did not choose the right way. He could
have planned a complex process, mobilizing Israel's friends in the
administration, Congress and the media or, alternatively, he could have
tried to persuade Bush in private conversation. But Sharon chose to be
right, not smart.
Sharon says that he does not regret his statements. "The supposed
argument is behind us," he said yesterday. If the United States opens fire
on Afghanistan soon, it might be that he is right. The Munich crisis will
be swept away, together with many other topics, in the great current of the
This artcile ran in Yediot Aharonot on October 7, 2001
friendly version of this article
Return to Contents
President Arafat: "Israel continues to violate International Legitimacy Resolutions"
Demands Implementation of the #194 resolution and the "right of return" for all Palestinian Arab Refugees from 1948
Arafat: "Israel continues to violate the International Legitimacy
Resolutions" [demands implementation of 194 - right of return]
Doha/Qatar October 10th Wafa (Official Palestine News Agency), President
Yasser Arafat emphasized today, the importance of materializing the alert
status of the International community and their positive attitude towards
the Palestinian issue, by launching an urgent UN resolution to oblige Israel
to ceasefire and stop its aggression against the Palestinian people.
Addressing the Foreign Ministers of the Organization of the Islamic
Countries, OIC, convention, in Doha/Qatar, H.E. said that Israel keeps
violating the International laws and resolutions by its breaches of the
ceasefire and rejecting the implementation of the signed agreements,
including the Mitchell Report Recommendations and the Tenet understandings.
H.E. also emphasized the importance of setting a mechanism for observing the
ceasefire, by sending International observers to the Palestinian lands in
order to stop the bloodshed from both sides, which is an important move to
secure the area for resuming the peace process based on the Israeli
withdrawal from the all Palestinian and Arab occupied lands, returning to
the June 4th 1967 borders, and implementing the UN resolutions 242, 338,
425, and 194, stopping the international double standard policy committed
towards the area and some parts of the world.
H.E. emphasized the Palestinian choice of peace as a strategic option, and
the peaceful negotiations as the only way to solve disputes, although being
targeted with the most vicious and barbaric assaults and attacks while the
entire International community is busy with fighting against the heinous
H.E. concluded as saying that the Palestinians are ready to deal positively
with the USA and the International position that meets the Palestinian
expectations, in order to be free and be able to establish their own
independent state, ending the occupation of the Palestinian lands and the
holy sites of the Muslims and the Christians.
friendly version of this article
Return to Contents
The Bin Laden Palestinian Arab Connection
Senior Arab Affairs Correspondent, Yediot Aharonot
Mohammed Bin Laden, Osama's father, was a Saudi contractor who specialized in renovating mosques.
When it was decided to renovate the el-Aksa mosque, he was sent to
Jerusalem by the Saudi king to help with the work. Adnan Husseini, the director of The Wakf, recalls that Bin Laden Sr. lived for several months in Jerusalem's Shuafat neighborhood. His son, Osama, who was then seven years old, was at his side.
Bin Laden's first serious meeting with the Palestinians came in
The early '80s. In December 1979 he arrived in Afghanistan immediately
After the Soviet invasion and was one of the founders of the Islamic
Salvation Front, the volunteer army made up of Moslems from all over the world who joined the fight against the Communists. In the mountains of
Afghanistan he met Abdullah Azzam, a Palestinian from the village of Yabed next to Jenin, who was a leader of the Moslem Brotherhood in northern Samaria.
Azzam, who became Bin Laden's deputy, was an ideologue who called to
Unite the Kalachnikov and the Koran in the war against the Soviets
Specifically and in the war against the infidels in general. He was perhaps more of an influence than anyone else in Bin Laden's process of radicalization.
Abdullah Azzam was killed in a mysterious explosion in his car, and
his men accused the CIA of responsibility for his death.
In 1990 Bin Laden established the "Jihad Front Against the Jews
and the Crusaders" -- in effect, the international arm of his Al-Qaida
organization. In order to give the stamp of religious law to his
actions against Jews and Israel, a fatwa (religious ruling) was published in 1998 by religious authorities numbered among his supporters, according to which "All Moslems have the duty to kill the Americans and their allies
anywhere on earth, without differentiating between military personnel and
civilians, with the goal of liberating the el-Aksa mosque and the holy mosque in Mecca from the hold of the infidels, and in order to drive the American army From the lands of Islam."
One of the first recruits to the new organization was Nabil Oukal,
a Hamas operative and a resident of the Gaza Strip, who came to Pakistan
to study. There he was drafted into the organization and sent to a
training camp in the mountains of Afghanistan. During his training he met one of Bin Laden's senior aides. When he returned to Gaza, Oukal met with
Sheikh Yassin and reported to him on his training. He received from Yassin
$10,000 to be used to train suicide bombers. To this day it is not
clear if there was a direct or indirect connection between the sheikh and
Bin Laden to facilitate this cooperation. Instructions were sent to Oukal
By e-mail by another one of Bin Laden operatives in Britain who was
Supposed to arrive in Israel to carry out terror attacks. Oukal himself was
arrested on June 1, 2000, on his way to a training camp in Pakistan.
In the year 2000 other Palestinian recruits of Bin Laden's were
arrested -- Sayid Hindawi from Halhoul and Basel Abu-Daka from Tulkarm, both of whom had studied in Pakistan.
The security establishment believes that Bin Laden has several
"sleeper" terrorist cells in the territories, and that they could begin to
operate when the directive arrives from Afghanistan or from one of the secret headquarters in Europe
This article ran in Yediot Aharonot on October 12, 2001.
friendly version of this article
Return to Contents
Terrorism: How the US Ignored the Money Trail
Despite sanctions, terrorists like Osama bin Laden are able to use
the international banking system to finance vast and expensive networks.
In testimony before the Senate Banking Committee last week, Michigan Sen.
Carl Levin explained how the money moves.
Levin has introduced the Money Laundering Abatement Act to tighten
protections against such international money laundering. For a full
text of his testimony, go to the web at
In the welter of events following the bombing of the World Trade
Center in February 26, 1993, few noticed that the first man arrested, Mohammed
Salameh -- the poor, unemployed illegal immigrant -- offered $5 million for
Where could he get this kind of money?
The judge refused bail. But was the source of Salameh's offer the same
as the one that funded the eight men -- arrested shortly afterward -- who
planned to blow up Manhattan's tunnels and bridges and to assassinate
Were the same money sources behind the final attack on the World Trade
Center on September 11?
Now, a frantic search to identify funds belonging to radical Muslim
terrorist organizations is on. Osama bin Laden has been accused of
being the source for both attacks on the World Trade Center, as well as the
Pentagon. President George W. Bush has declared that "Al Qaeda is to
terror what the Mafia is to organized crime." But it is more than
Al-Qaeda, Osama bin Laden's terrorist network, is an elaborate
international criminal organization and a much bigger threat than the
"We have tougher laws against organized crime and drug trafficking
than terrorism," Atty. Gen. John Ashcroft told the House Judiciary
Committee,on September 24th. And he went on to outline the Bush administration's proposals for changes in U.S. laws dealing with terrorism,
incorporating some of the same legislation that has been used against organized crime and drug trafficking organizations for decades.
The September 11 attacks on the World Trade Center and Pentagon were
another wake-up call to the West about terrorism and its elaborate financing.
For a long time, there has been evidence that terrorist, international
drug trafficking and criminal organizations use the same fund-raising
methods to enrich themselves.
Yet no one seemed to connect the dots. And no one seriously tried to
crack down on their financing.
Bin Laden's is only one among many hostile international criminal
organizations, often state-sponsored, that will do whatever they can
to diminish the status of the United States as the only superpower.
According to a State Department report, the Taliban, who are at bin
Laden's service, has the advantage of controlling the world's largest
heroin production and distribution in the world.
Since the Taliban took over Afghanistan, the heroin production soared
to hundreds of tons each year. In 1999 alone, the world production of
heroin was estimated at 500 metric tons; 400 were produced by the Taliban and available to fund bin Laden and his associates worldwide.
The writing was on the wall on July 5, 1991, when the Bank of England
shut down what was the most important Islamic bank in the world, the Bank
of Credit and Commerce International (BCCI). This criminal entity was
created by the Pakistani Aaga Hassan Abedi "to fight the evil influence of the West"; to help with the creation of the "Islamic Bomb"; to finance all
Muslim terrorist organizations; and to launder the money that was
generated mostly by illicit drug trafficking and other illegal
activities, including arms trafficking.
When BCCI went belly up, we learned from thousands of documents that
Abu Nidal -- the notorious Palestinian terrorist organization that now
enjoys the hospitality of Iraq's Saddam Hussein, the Palestine Liberation
Organization (PLO), Hezbollah and bin Laden -- had accounts in the
By the end of the 1980s, the "special services" provided by BCCI
included access to Western humanitarian and international development funds, as well as drug money laundering, secret transfers of cash and bribes.
A "Black Network," a special enforcement unit supported by Abu Nidal
and other terrorist organizations, operated from Pakistan. The same
Pakistan that harbored bin Laden for many years while its officials told the United States that they didn't know his whereabouts. And the same Pakistan that for decades, even according to the State Department's annual report, had been a major drug trafficking and money laundering center.
Yet, now more importantly, we also discovered that the American and
British governments knew and kept the bank open for a long time. The
bank "that would bribe God" was able to get away with its criminal
activities for decades due to Abedi's clever portrayal of the Muslim nations as victims of Western -- and particularly U.S. -- "imperialism." And when the bank was shuttered, the accusation in the Muslim/Arab and Third World countries was that the U.S. and the United Kingdom governments closed the bank to curtail the growing fiscal power of Muslim countries.
Like Abedi, anti-American, anti-Western terrorist and radical Muslim
states and organizations, such as the Taliban, Al Qaeda, Hamas,
Hezbollah, the PLO, Iraq and Iran, use Western democratic rhetoric to their
advantage. But it is the willful blindness, mainly toward the growing
volume of drug money laundering, exercised by Western bankers on the
one hand and Western politicians on the other, that makes money laundering
possible, despite the many laws and international conventions to
control this phenomenon.
The BCCI was the first warning to the West. The second warning about
the abuse of European and American financial markets by terrorist
organizations, as well as their involvement in the illicit arms and
drug trade, was made in February 1994 by the British National Criminal
Intelligence Service (NCIS).
The Organized Crime Unit of the NCIS warned that Middle East terrorist
groups and states were targeting the financial centers of London,
Frankfurt and other Western countries, and that they favor illegal
drug trafficking, money laundering and fraud.
The reaction in the United States and other Western countries was a
barrage of anti-money-laundering regulations and allegedly better
banking supervision. A new anti-money laundering industry sprung up, and
billions were spent on the development of new technologies and many instruments to monitor these illegal activities.
Yet the ease with which bin Laden Inc. was able to prosper and bilk
the markets just before their attack on America is strong evidence that
the anti-money-laundering measures and insider trading laws are largely
ineffective. It also proves that technology alone is not the answer,
that human intelligence is necessary to fight this, like other wars.
It also brought home the realization that laws and regulations are not
worth the paper they are written on without the political will to
Testifying on money laundering and terrorism before the Senate
Committee on Banking, Housing and Urban Affairs on September 26, Sen. Carl Levin, D-Mich., warned that "the evidence is clear that terrorists are using our own financial institutions against us."
This is not surprising, since the terrorists have been using our
democratic system to undermine it and destroy our way of life all
The naive U.S. attitude that our successful capitalistic democracy,
combined with financial and technical aid negotiations, would bring
around the radical Muslims failed miserably.
Despite its stated policy of not negotiating with terrorists, the
Clinton administration went out of its way to appease a few of the 20th
century's most notorious terror groups: the Revolutionary Armed Forces of
Colombia (FARC), the PLO and the Irish Republican Army. All are heavily
involved in the drug trade.
On the eve of the 1993 handshake on the White House lawn between
Israeli Prime Minister Yitzak Rabin and PLO Chairman Yasser Arafat, Britain's National Criminal Intelligence Service estimated the PLO's ill-gotten gains to total between $8 billion to $10 billion, with an annual
income of about $1.5 billion to $2 billion from "donations, extortion, payoffs, illegal arms dealing, drug trafficking, money laundering, fraud, etc."
Since then, Washington has only aided and abetted the PLO. Since the
start of the Oslo process, Arafat has received at least $3 billion more from the United States and the international community, without any serious
demand for accountability, according to a report this year to Congress.
Arafat, in well-documented instances, has been systematically skimming off
portions of these funds, as he has with monies given to him on behalf
of the refugees in the camps.
The PLO was in the drug trafficking business almost from the
Operating from Lebanon, under Habash's able leadership and assisted by
a PLO-owned shipping company SUMUD, the organization exported hashish,
opium, heroin and cocaine, first to Europe and later even to the
United States and Australia. In return, it obtained weapons for their war
against Israel and the West, and amassed a massive treasure trove. In
addition, the PLO and Arafat, who enjoy the financial and strategic support of Hussein and bin Laden, have the distinction of being the organization
that promoted "suicide bombers" as a weapon.
Yet the Clinton administration subsidized a multitude of radical
Palestinian groups, ranging from Arafat's Fatah branch of the PLO and
its military wing, the Tanzim, to the socialist-nationalist Popular Front
for the Liberation of Palestine (PFLP), headed by George Habash, all with
close ties to bin Laden, Iraq and Iran.
The Bush administration seems destined to repeat the same mistake as
its predecessor, dismissing verbal Palestinian leadership attacks on the
United States as a need for internal "propaganda." It fails to
understand, even after the terrible attacks, that all terrorist organizations are the same.
Thus, it is difficult to comprehend that the administration has just
offered to remove Damascus from the State Department's list of
terrorist sponsors if Syria joins the U.S.-led coalition against bin Laden. It was the Clinton White House that, despite evidence to the contrary,
removed Syria from its list of the drug trafficking countries, to entice Syria to join the "peace process" in the Middle East.
The failure of that process and the compromises the United States has
made to maintain an illusion of peaceful prospects had no doubt added to
the Muslim radical terrorists' resolve to attack what they see as a naive
and vulnerable America.
In another example of self-delusion, in 1999, then Secretary of State
Madeleine Albright suggested a U.S.-led coalition to negotiate with
the FARC and supported Colombia President Pastrana's "land for peace"
initiative, despite a report from the General Accounting Office that
the FARC is running a major international criminal enterprise that, among
other things, supplies hundreds of tons of cocaine and heroin to the
U.S. black market.
This second Clinton "land for peace" initiative gave half of Colombia
to the narco-terrorist FARC, while doing nothing to diminish its violence
or appetite to control the rest of the country.
Instead of re-evaluating this misguided policy, the Bush
administration, even after declaring war on terrorism, appears to be drifting toward embracing it -- by giving some regimes that sponsor terrorism a pass for their cooperation in a U.S. coalition.
More difficult to comprehend is the omission of two of the most vocal
radical Muslim, anti-American terrorist organizations -- Hamas and
Hezbollah -- from the presidential order to freeze their assets.
Even if America receives help, it will remain important to follow and
cut off the money supply to terrorist groups and their state sponsors.
The United States may achieve a short-term goal of finding bin Laden and
perhaps unseating the Taliban, but there will remain plenty of
anti-U.S. terrorists prepared to take their place.
The West has already had several warnings. If it doesn't try to choke
the financing of terrorism now, it invites another tragedy like the
attacks on the World Trade Center and the Pentagon -- probably with even deadlier weapons.
This article ran in the Detroit News
on October 10, 2001. The writer is the director of the New York
based "center for the study of corruption"
friendly version of this article
Return to Contents
the Israel Resource
The Israel Resource Review is brought to you by
the Israel Resource, a media firm based at the Bet Agron Press Center in
Jerusalem, and the Gaza Media Center under the juristdiction of the Palestine
You can contact us on email@example.com.